Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion On time babies have higher intelligence?

How can you tell what effect it had or didn't have? I think that all you can say is that your kids are doing well (which is plenty). I'm skeptical, just because being born prematurely certainly isn't optimal, and if it has any possible effect at all, which has been demonstrated, I don't see a reason to assume that being somewhat premature has zero effect. You can probably take a bit of an edge off someone with vast potential and still leave vast potential.

Similarly, malnutrition is known to inhibit brain development-- and I see no reason to assume that that effect wouldn't be suffered by everyone, do you?-- yet I'm sure there are quite a few brilliant people who were at least somewhat malnourished at some point in their development. Wouldn't they have been better off under optimal conditions?

I guess what I was saying that, as far as we know, none of our kids did get those learning disabilities that they were statistically higher to get. (unless they did, but no one has mentioned that) Having said that, that part of the articles isn't "intelligence".
As far as whether the intelligence was docked at all for being born early, I guess we will never know.

I have heard this many times...DD was born 5 weeks early, and I had a very traumatic pregnancy and birth.... well DH and I like to joke that it is a good thing she was a preemie or there is no telling where she would be. She is 3 and has been identified as PG. So I think it is one of those statistical things...yes, probably is the case, but as in all things, there are outliers. And DD is an outlier I guess LOL

I'll take my outlier very happily, given the alternative!

And I agree, they are outliers.

My son was born 26 weeks premature and he was less than two pounds. He is now 18 years old and he is gifted. He won gold medal at UK maths challenge and he is doing extremely well even he is the youngest in his class. He is going to go Southampton University and study aeronatical engineering. So I know the statistic but I just would like tell it is also to do with genes as well. Thanks

[My son was born 26 weeks premature and he was less than two pounds. He is now 18 years old and he is gifted. He won gold medal at UK maths challenge and he is doing extremely well even he is the youngest in his class. He is going to go Southampton University and study aeronatical engineering. So I know the statistic but I just would like tell it is also to do with genes as well. Thanks

I went into preterm labor with DS10 at 23 weeks. We held on with lots of bedrest and plenty of drug until 36 weeks when the he was born as a happy, healthy 7.5 pound baby boy. He is now a DYS.

I started having early contraction with DD1 at 15 weeks and went back on bedrest and progesterone shots. She was born at 38 weeks as a happy, healthy baby girl. She continues to amaze us with her cognitive abilities and is definitely giving her big brother a run for his money.

For both kids, I had steroid shots between 26-32 weeks to help develop lung function in case of an early birth. DH and I have always joked about this effect on their development. They have always seemed like their development was on steroids, both mentally and physically.

It seems like we have an unusually high percentage of preterm births here. Perhaps, by playing the devil's advocate, we could argue that weeks spent in a dark uterus are less stimulating than weeks spent in the big, bright world. Please note that this is said with a large pinch of humor. I am certainly not advocating preterm births for everyone as a way of producing PGlets.

Both my kids were 3-4 weeks early by planned cesarean section. Long story, but it had nothing to do with their development and everything to do with concerns of my uterus holding up. They did everything from day one on track or early. Both of them were kind of scarily aware newborns.


I buy into this theory.

There is the question of what it means to be early, on time and late. Most research into due dates shows that are usually very off and that the 40 week timeline can be very innaccurate. NICU rates have been rising due to doctors inducing or planning c-sections at 39 weeks because they think all babies are ready by then. This happened to my nephew. Then you hear of babies born much earlier than that (35 or 36 weeks) and are just fine.

I think early, on time, or late depends on the baby. If the baby is born when they're ready to be born and suffer no problems from that birth, then I would say they were on time.

Sorry -- I'll get off my soapbox now. Did waaaayyy too much research before my son was born.

For purposes of counting - mine were "on time." My son was technically 8 days after is his due date and my daughter was one day after. Not sure where they are on the IQ scale, but they're definitely giving me a run for my money.

I would also hazard to guess that breastfeeding, or at least a nurturing environment, and proper prenatal care have more of an impact on IQ (statistically over a large population) than when the child was born for anything besides severely premature.

I only breastfed my daughter for 8 weeks, but am practicing extended breastfeeding for my son. Prenatal nutrition was about the same for each.

I work with a neonatologist who specializes in the perinatal follow-up of premature infants (at least until the age of three). He has accumulated years of data in our province. The very first question he asks when learning a baby's history is "Are the parents married?" Factoring out all other variables, this is the most consistent one in the cognitive and mental development (as measured via the Bayley's Developmental Assessment) of the prems in our area. Says something about the importance of a stable social environment in these situations. I would love to see his data used in longitudinal studies.

The biggest problem with any research on premature babies is that there are so many variables to consider. An 'uncomplicated' late-preterm infant could suffer long-term outcomes from a short, transient bout of hypoglycemia just after birth while an severely ill 26-weeker could escape seemingly unscathed.